Where’s my chewy, tactical core surrounded by a delicious strategic shell?

2K’s press release describes a game in which the player controls a single character from a first-person perspective. XCOM puts you into the shoes of an FBI agent -- not an operative of the X-Com organization -- who must overcome “high-stake odds through risky strategic gambits.” What does that mean, exactly?

Although the statement is ambiguous, I’m very skeptical that we’ll have a strategic layer based on managing the resources of scientists for research, engineers for manufacturing new technology, countries around the world for continued funding, soldiers and all their equipment for combat, radar for UFO detection, and time (which -- in the original -- is quickly running out as the alien force infiltrates funding nations around the world to shut down X-Com and enslave all of humanity).

I’m also skeptical that the first-person combat is going to retain the same flavor of the battles in the original series. Ultimately, the tactical options offered in modern-FPS games are shallow at best (i.e., should I shoot with this gun...or that gun?) and hindered by linear level design.

X-Com provides players with many meaningful decisions to consider throughout an engagement. Players must manage and carefully spend time units (TU), the measure by which soldiers can perform actions during a turn -- you will have no retries. Should you spend all your TUs to move quickly across open ground, or should you save some in order to make use of reactionary fire during the aliens’ turn?

Breaching UFOs, setting up firing lanes, flanking an enemy from across the map, blowing holes in walls to open new movement options, or leveling an entire building to forgo the risk of close-quartered combat -- certainly, these are options available in FPS titles as well; however, X-Com grounds these elements with the concepts of soldier fragility and permanent death.

Unlike most modern-FPS games, X-Com forces players to make tough choices and accept the consequences. You cannot win through attrition -- your soldiers don't have regenerative health, nor is the player coddled with frequent checkpoint saves. The lack of those mechanics now common in shooters adds significant heft to your tactical decisions.

Players weigh all of these against gathered intelligence during the “hidden movement” phase of combat -- the alien’s turn. You’ll hear doors open, shots fired, civilians slaughtered, and explosions set. You’ll catch a brief glimpse of these events, and then develop a plan for your team. You have to think ahead.

The success of these battles ties into the strategy shell around the combat portion of the game. You need to collect alien technology to research at your bases, and those discoveries will fill your manufacturing plants with new weapons, flying craft, and base structures to build. This progress is vital to your ability to overcome the alien menace.

All the while, you need to constantly monitor the skies for UFOs, shoot them down, and investigate the crash sites. Failure to be vigilant means that nations around the world drop funding for the organization, which makes protecting the Earth much more difficult. Let enough UFOs slip by, and the aliens may infiltrate governments and permanently pull all X-Com funding. Two months of negative growth is the end of the game.

These elements create a tight, focused experience which pits the player against a computer opponent working toward its own goals. The alien menace isn’t just a roadblock on the way to winning; it’s actively trying to undermine your chances. It’s a real opponent.

Keeping the hope alive

Maybe I’m jumping the gun. Certainly, many of the aforementioned elements of X-Com could be implemented in a FPS-style game. The Rainbow Six series demonstrates that tactical combat and squad-based mechanics are possible in that genre. Certainly, 2K could give players a team of FBI agents instead of the single character described in the press release.

And a strategic layer could be in the game, too. Your agents could investigate a series of linear occurrences of alleged alien activity and return to headquarters with evidence that the lab researches for the player. Perhaps you’ll receive new weapons and other gadgetry this way.

It’s possible, but 2K’s reveal hasn’t assured me that any of these elements will be present at all. I have the impression that the developer will hand us something very much like the Bioshock series -- heavy emphasis on storytelling and settling with solid -- but not terribly special -- FPS combat mechanics.

XCOM could be a great game, but deep down I still wonder if it’s really X-Com.

When Bethesda rebooted Fallout, they retained everything that made the first two games so unique and engaging: the role-playing mechanics like the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system, perks, and skills; the iconic character types like super mutants, ghouls, and raiders; the black humor wrapped in a ’50s aesthetic; the open-world nature of the wasteland; and the excessively gory, grisly deaths.

I loved Fallout 3 as much as the first two. Aside from altering the perspective to first-person and replacing turn-based combat with real-time-with-pause (via the V.A.T.S. mechanic), it still preserved Fallout mythos and gameplay.

All we have to go on at the moment is a press release -- magazine articles are surely on the way with detailed gameplay systems. Like Fallout 3, XCOM may surprise us as a sequel in the spirit of the series it's based on. I may be worried, but I haven't given up yet.